Looking at a revolver

U

ump45

New member
What would be the SIG P226 or P220 equivalent in a revolver? Something utterly reliable, accurate out of the box, durable, etc.
 
K- or L-frame .357 Magnum, Ruger GP100, steel Taurus Tracker (can't give the Total Ti guns an unconditional A+ yet, occasional glitches still occur).
 
Sorta.
P-220.....revolver counterpart.......S&W Model 25-5 in 4"barrel.

P-226.....revolver counterpart......S&W Model 28 in 4" barrel.

Both discontinued but both also avainable in very nice condition on the used market. Fit, finish and function way up there. Reliability and longevity outstanding.

I chose the 4" barrel for its closeness to the Sig models, remember that revolver barrel length does not count cartridge length.

I think the Sig 220 in .45 ACP is a great gun, for an autoloader.:)

Sam
 
The 4" barrel length seems a little short to me. I think I am interested in a medium frame 6" barrel DA revovler in .357 Mag.

I want accuracy out of the box. Do not want to have to get work done on it to get it in to shape suitable for defensive purposes.

I want modern safety mechanisms. Nothing should make the gun shoot except for my finger squeezing the trigger.

I want a durable design that will not break down after repeated use. Disassembly and cleaning should be very easy.

Most of all I want top-notch reliability, which is the reason I am getting a revolver over a semi-auto in the first place.

I haven't done a lot of research on revolvers, have only shot a few, and need some suggestions for which are the best. I come here asking for advice because I don't trust my local gunshops to give me the best advice. The primary uses of this gun will be for home-defense, target shooting, and possible occasional concealed carry. Thanks in advance for your help!
 
I'd like to put in a plug for the Ruger Security Six series of guns. No longer made but very rugged and well made. D.A. trigger pull is not up to S&W levels but can be worked with. Ease of takedown and therefore preventive maintenance is second to none.
 
I'll second the vote for the Security Six. Incredibly reliable- moreso than S&W or Colt, in my (possibly limited) experience, accurate, and impossible to wear out or overload with factory ammo (a handloader no doubt could blow one up with a big enough overload but it would take some doing). I had my 6" barreled one tuned to the smoothest action I have ever felt on a revolver without much trouble. Only possible drawback is that the ejector rod won't push empties all the way out, but if you point it up and smack the rod- a good habit to get into in any case- they usually fall out. I don't have a GP100 but I'm not convinced that they are any improvement.
 
Why did they discontinue the Security Six? I'm leary of getting a discontinued gun. What did they replace it with?
 
ump45, They replaced the Security Six with the GP-100. The reason that I have heard is that lots of use of the hot 125 gr factory .357 ammunition would eventually split the forcing cone of the barrel (rearmost section of barrel). That being said it was still substantially tougher than the similarly sized Smith & Wesson K frame.

The GP-100 is larger than the Sec. Six and heavier (cylinder diameter 1.50 vs. 1.60" if memory serves). This makes it easier to shoot and tougher but not as easy to carry. Lots of us prefer the discontinued revolver.
 
ump45 -

Look at the L-frame smith. Used of course. You may be interested in the model 586 or 686 (different finishes). I would stick to C.R. Sam's recomendation on a 4 inch tube. You will have a very hard time concealing that 6 inch hog leg, and there is really very little practical differrence in accuracy between the two. They will both put rounds where you point them.

I personally own a 6" because it had great asthetic appeal, but I don't use it for concealed carry. It's too darn big for that.
 
Thanks for that explanation AC. Very instructive.

I don't see the GP100 on the ruger website. But how does it compare to the KGP141?

edit: IamNOTaNUT, good advice. I'm gonna get a 4" barrel not a 6".
 
AndrewT, I hope you don't have this kind of attitude when talking to people in person. Lay off buddy, I didn't do a damn thing to you.
 
I took a look on the S&W website, and the 4" 686 appears to be identical to the 4"686P, except I get an extra round with the 686P. Is there any reason to get the 686, since the 686P gives an extra round?

The S&W 25-5 and 28 are not on the S&W website. How do they compare to the 686?
 
Last edited:
I have had/have nearly all the barrel lengths. Seems that the 4" is the handiest for an all round gun.

If you are lookin at the 686, suggest considerin a 586. A bit stronger and since it is no longer in production, would be a pre-agreement product.

Sam
 
UMP45:

The KGP141 is a GP100. The K is for stainless, the *4* is for the 4 inch barrel.

I have both the KGP141 and Smith and Wesson 686, stainless in 4" tube. Like both guns. I don't think you can go wrong with either. The extra couple of dollars for the Smith buys a slightly smoother trigger and marginally better fit and finish. The adjustable sights are, imo, better on the Smith although both are adequate.

I bought the Ruger to shoot and the Smith on speculation. Wouldn't sell either now.
 
FWIW, I understand that the 6 inch barrel increases velocity substantially in the .357/125 grain round. I agree that it's awkward to carry- I have the 6" at home and the 2.75" for carry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top